Another PR disaster incoming ??

[NoirLotus]

According to reddit, WG Russia made copyright complaints on the YT channel of a popular russian streamer.

 

The official reason is that this streamer is highly toxic and frequently insults devs, but instead of complainig to YT for a violation of ToS, WG chose the copyright claims because it is faster ...

 

I guess we are going for a new SirFoch case ...

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/qzt2kf/wargaming_bans_russian_streamers_channel_on_yt/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

[SodaBubbles]

No PR disaster here, quite the opposite. WG appears to have handled it well, having exhausted all avenues, they moved on him. I doubt the community will get too excited about it. 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

4 minutes ago, SodaBubbles said:

No PR disaster here, quite the opposite. WG appears to have handled it well, having exhausted all avenues, they moved on him. I doubt the community will get too excited about it. 

 

Might still turn out to be disaster. There's only one 'entity' in the world who is allowed to freely piss on the DMCA. And it ain't WG....

[Aragathor]

The more I learn about the case, the more I'm convinced both sides are at fault here. The streamer appears to be a complete douche nozzle. And WG handled him in a way, that reminds one of an elephant in a china shop.

[invicta2012]

Just now, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

Might still turn out to be disaster. There's only one 'entity' in the world who is allowed to freely piss on the DMCA. And it ain't WG....

DMCA has nothing to do with it. The use of WG's copyright game assets in third party content is conditional, and very high on that list of conditions is that the CC (or whoever it is) is not using WGs assets as part of defamatory, offensive or illegal material. If they've crossed into that area and have refused all polite requests to desist, WG (or any other copyright holder) is fairly within their rights to ask YouTube to shut a channel down.  And YouTube will do it. 

[ColorsOfRainbows]

13 minutes ago, SodaBubbles said:

No PR disaster here, quite the opposite. WG appears to have handled it well, having exhausted all avenues, they moved on him. I doubt the community will get too excited about it. 

Using Copyright claims for other stuff is not ok and should never be ok no matter the circumstances

[SodaBubbles]

1 minute ago, ColorsOfRainbows said:

Using Copyright claims for other stuff is not ok and should never be ok no matter the circumstances

Other avenues appear to be slower. I own a few copyrights, so I can see both sides. 

The problem for me was that they waited so long. 

[MementoMori_6030]

Russians vs. Russians? 

[NoirLotus]

10 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

The more I learn about the case, the more I'm convinced both sides are at fault here. The streamer appears to be a complete douche nozzle. And WG handled him in a way, that reminds one of an elephant in a china shop.

Yep, my opinion too !!

[The_Angry_Admiral]

44 minutes ago, NoirLotus said:

According to reddit, WG Russia made copyright complaints on the YT channel of a popular russian streamer.

 

The official reason is that this streamer is highly toxic and frequently insults devs, but instead of complainig to YT for a violation of ToS, WG chose the copyright claims because it is faster ...

 

I guess we are going for a new SirFoch case ...

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/qzt2kf/wargaming_bans_russian_streamers_channel_on_yt/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

You can't misuse the Copyright Claim system. 

 

That streamer could push and get a strike against Wargaming. 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

15 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

The more I learn about the case, the more I'm convinced both sides are at fault here. The streamer appears to be a complete douche nozzle. And WG handled him in a way, that reminds one of an elephant in a china shop.

You can be a real [edited] but it all still falls under Fair Use. You can't copyright strike someone for being a [edited]. 

[Yedwy]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:45 PM, invicta2012 said:

DMCA has nothing to do with it. The use of WG's copyright game assets in third party content is conditional, and very high on that list of conditions is that the CC (or whoever it is) is not using WGs assets as part of defamatory, offensive or illegal material. If they've crossed into that area and have refused all polite requests to desist, WG (or any other copyright holder) is fairly within their rights to ask YouTube to shut a channel down.  And YouTube will do it. 

Wait, wait let’s get this straight…

 

Say I have a YT Channel about let’s say reviewing cars, now I go out and borrow/rent/buy/whatever a car lets say for example a Peugout, now I make a review and say how its badly put together, it broke down 3 times during testing etc and PSA puts a copyright claim on the channel Because well its derogative and I refused to take it off on their demand…

 

We have a case of - if you dont intend to say only positive things about the product dont say anything stance, aaaand That’s ok? Since when exactly?

[Animalul2012]

Bad response from WG for what is supposed to be a big clown. They just feed him content, grist to the mill as is it said in some slavic countries.

[BurningPoop]

Out of the loop these days, but before checking the streamers name I'm willing to make a bet that It's "Nomen Est Omen" or something like that...

 

Edit: Lol, it's was him.

[CapnGebs]

Regardless of how unpleasant someone might be or how much WG hate someones content. The copyright system is purely for breaches of copyright.

 

This is exactly what has happened in the past with WG incidents. I remember Mighty Jingles getting involved and trying to clarify the copyright strike situation with WG in the past. Youtube streamers were concerned that they could get copyright struck if WG just decided they didnt like something that was said. The SirFoch incident led to statements like

 

 ”Our official position is that Wargaming will not take copyright action against opinions based on our publicly released content.” The statement was signed by Thaine Lyman, Product Director World of Tanks; Markus Schill, General Manager Europe; Jay Cohen, General Manager North America; and Anton Pankov, World of Tanks Publishing Director

Wargaming Releases Statement on Fochgate Controversy - INN (imperium.news)

 

Slander, defamation, libel, slurs, racism these are all things that can be acted upon in various ways for example shutting WoWs accounts or even legal proceedings but the copyright system is not one of them, it is only for breaches of copyright.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

1 hour ago, invicta2012 said:

DMCA has nothing to do with it. The use of WG's copyright game assets in third party content is conditional, and very high on that list of conditions is that the CC (or whoever it is) is not using WGs assets as part of defamatory, offensive or illegal material. If they've crossed into that area and have refused all polite requests to desist, WG (or any other copyright holder) is fairly within their rights to ask YouTube to shut a channel down.  And YouTube will do it. 

 

I just don't know if they can legally place conditions on any single person, or if it's a blanket policy that remains the same for everyone. CC's are a matter of internal policy, so it depends on what the terms are there, of couse. They can terminate his CC status, but then again, I don't really see how this becomes a valid copyright issue. I suppose they could get an injunction against him but that is way above my head when it comes to legal stuff.

 

YouTube will shut down a channel due to copyright strikes, yes, and notably whether those copyright strikes are legit or not (it's not like they give a f*** anyway). They will also close down a channel over ToS/content violations. However, does this qualify for that? Remember also, that corporations have no honor to defame, so it can't be a libel/slander case either, though I don't know if devs as representatives are individuals (they might be if they get targeted with personal attacks) or covered by the 'corporate entity' blanket.

 

1 hour ago, ColorsOfRainbows said:

Using Copyright claims for other stuff is not ok and should never be ok no matter the circumstances

 

Nope. Still gets done, though.

 

1 hour ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

You can't misuse the Copyright Claim system. 

 

That streamer could push and get a strike against Wargaming. 

 

You can misuse it, or rather abuse it. Most if not all regular channels have no means of actually fighting wrongful copyright claims.

[invicta2012]

 

46 minutes ago, CapnGebs said:

Regardless of how unpleasant someone might be or how much WG hate someones content. The copyright system is purely for breaches of copyright.

 

This is exactly what has happened in the past with WG incidents. I remember Mighty Jingles getting involved and trying to clarify the copyright strike situation with WG in the past. Youtube streamers were concerned that they could get copyright struck if WG just decided they didnt like something that was said. The SirFoch incident led to statements like

 

 ”Our official position is that Wargaming will not take copyright action against opinions based on our publicly released content.” The statement was signed by Thaine Lyman, Product Director World of Tanks; Markus Schill, General Manager Europe; Jay Cohen, General Manager North America; and Anton Pankov, World of Tanks Publishing Director

Wargaming Releases Statement on Fochgate Controversy - INN (imperium.news)

 

Slander, defamation, libel, slurs, racism these are all things that can be acted upon in various ways for example shutting WoWs accounts or even legal proceedings but the copyright system is not one of them, it is only for breaches of copyright.

It's a system to allow copyright holders to protect themselves from unauthorised public use of their intellectual properties. All WG are saying is "we've withdrawn our consent from this person's use of our material, it's now unlicensed, it should be taken down". 

 

CCs and streamers tend, as you say, to be given quite substantial liberty by companies who want them to talk about their products and build audiences for them. But if a CC/streamer goes rogue - and as I said, it usually needs something far nastier than the normal range of opinions for this to happen -  then a company is perfectly entitled to use the copyright system to protect their IP from misuse, because the CC/streamer doesn't have an unrestricted right or licence to use that material, consent can be withdrawn at any time.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

51 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

 

You can misuse it, or rather abuse it. Most if not all regular channels have no means of actually fighting wrongful copyright claims.

According to the ToS you can permanently lose your channel for making false copyright strikes. 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

1 minute ago, invicta2012 said:

 

It's a system to allow copyright holders to protect themselves from unauthorised public use of their intellectual properties. All WG are saying is "we've withdrawn our consent from this person's use of our material, it's now unlicensed, it should be taken down". 

.

That's not how it works. 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

1 hour ago, Yedwy said:

Wait, wait let’s get this straight…

 

Say I have a YT Channel about let’s say reviewing cars, now I go out and borrow/rent/buy/whatever a car lets say for example a Peugout, now I make a review and say how its badly put together, it broke down 3 times during testing etc and PSA puts a copyright claim on the channel Because well its derogative and I refused to take it off on their demand…

 

We have a case of if you dont intend to say posutive things thing say anything stance, aaaand That’s ok? Since when exactly?

no, it's one thing to talk about products but another to defame WG and their employees or use their products to defame them. You can criticise their ships and their ideas but being insulting, toxic and defaming actively while using assets provided by them to you as a CC can land you this strike under his described circumstances.

 

Tbh that behavior is disgusting. Why be a CC of a company you dislike so much so that you defame them?

[Yosha_AtaIante]

#

 

Just leaving this here for all the anti WG soldiers trying to find a way to put all the blame on WG again.

Let's not support people who personally insult developers and have pepega opinions on actually viable or OP boats even. This useless and misleading content he had on YT is gone for good

 

WGs response:

[Yedwy]

19 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

According to the ToS you can permanently lose your channel for making false copyright strikes. 

Lol, do they still have the policy that the party whose material was claimed has to appeal to the guy/corp that claimed it?

 

11 minutes ago, Yosha_nai said:

no, it's one thing to talk about products but another to defame WG and their employees or use their products to defame them. You can criticise their ships and their ideas but being insulting, toxic and defaming actively while using assets provided by them to you as a CC can land you this strike under his described circumstances.

 

Tbh that behavior is disgusting. Why be a CC of a company you dislike so much so that you defame them?

TBH if an individual within a company feels grieved by a claim form such person on a personal level he should look for satisfaction for insult/defamation in a civil court suit, same goes for the company as a legal entity, copyright claims is NOT the way one should be allowed to do so if the copyright wasnt infringed... 

 

Say the guy ripped/datamined WGs ship models and put them in his own game - that is copyright infringement

But the guy ripping on WG Flamu style - that is NOT copyright infringement, it can be defamation yes BUT you CANNOT use copyright claims to "get even" with him, that is abuse and if that gets to relevant courts legal consequences for doing that can be EXTREME for the corp in question

[Yosha_AtaIante]

1 minute ago, Yedwy said:

Lol, do they still have the policy that the party whose material was claimed has to appeal to the guy/corp that claimed it?

yes

[hellhound666]

2 minutes ago, Yosha_nai said:

#

 

Just leaving this here for all the anti WG soldiers trying to find a way to put all the blame on WG again.

Let's not support people who personally insult developers and have pepega opinions on actually viable or OP boats even. This useless and misleading content he had on YT is gone for good

as a russian speaker i used to watch Nomen a lot but afaik he stopped wows streaming already some time ago and lately just posted videos about patch notes and was very critical about wows development

even more, he was an extremely skilled player and generally knew what he was talking about.

ive never seen issues mentioned in this post and wouldn't trust it that much - perhaps another developer

[Karasu_Browarszky]

22 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

According to the ToS you can permanently lose your channel for making false copyright strikes. 

 

Oh you sweet summer child...